Jump to content



Photo

Linus Torvalds: 2560x1600 Needs To Be Next Standard


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#1 Asrokhel

Asrokhel

    Neowinian

  • 1,027 posts
  • Joined: 05-April 12
  • OS: Windows 8 Pro x64 (testing to see if I keep it or go back to Windows 7)

Posted 02 November 2012 - 19:25

Linus Torvalds believes that it is time to leave antiquated screen resolutions behind.

Most of the buzz surrounding Google’s upcoming Nexus 10 tablet is on account of its WQXGA (2560×1600) display, the highest-resolution screen of any tablet out there. This isn’t the first time this year that a tablet has managed to grab headlines due to its display’s pixel count, though, with the now discontinued 3rd generation iPad also hogging a plenty of limelight for its 2048×1152 screen earlier this year. But even as manufacturers continue to up the display resolution ante in the highly competitive media tablet market, laptop vendors still seem content with 1366x768 displays for the most part. A certain Linus Torvalds has a major problem with that.

Known for speaking his mind, Linux creator Linus Torvalds recently took to Google Plus to do just that on the topic of laptop display resolutions: "So with even a $399 tablet [Nexus 10] doing 2560x1600 pixel displays, can we please just make that the new standard laptop resolution? Even at 11"? Please. Stop with the 'retina' crap, just call it 'reasonable resolution'. The fact that laptops stagnated ten years ago (and even regressed, in many cases) at around half that in both directions is just sad.”

“I still don't want big luggable laptops, but that 1366x768 is so last century. Christ, soon even the cellphones will start laughing at the ridiculously bad laptop displays.”

But he didn’t stop at criticizing WXGA-doting laptop makers, proceeding instead to blast tech journos: “And the next technology journalist that asks you whether you want fonts that small, I'll just hunt down and give an atomic wedgie. I want pixels for high-quality fonts, and yes, I want my fonts small, but ‘high resolution’ really doesn't equate ‘small fonts’ like some less-than-gifted tech pundits seem to constantly think.”

We think he has a point. Do you?










http://www.maximumpc...lution_displays


#2 Colin McGregor

Colin McGregor

    Neowinian Senior

  • 1,704 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 11
  • Location: Ontario, Canada
  • OS: Windows 8 x64, Gentoo x64 Sometimes
  • Phone: Samsung Ativ S WP8

Posted 02 November 2012 - 19:27

2560x1600 is one high res terminal

#3 szo

szo

    Neowinian

  • 596 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 03
  • Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Posted 02 November 2012 - 19:31

Retina White Text over Retina Black background! :laugh:

#4 Enron

Enron

    Windows for Workgroups

  • 9,739 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11
  • OS: Windows 8.1 U1
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900

Posted 02 November 2012 - 19:32

Why stop there? I want 4K resolution on my laptop and at least 1080p on my thermostat.

#5 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • 41,508 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:13

I like the way Linus thinks. :)

#6 xendrome

xendrome

    In God We Trust; All Others We Monitor

  • 7,330 posts
  • Joined: 05-December 01
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro x64

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:16

Already running it Linus :)

#7 Glassed Silver

Glassed Silver

    ☆♡Neowin's portion of Crazy♡☆

  • 10,729 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 04
  • Location: MY CATFORT in Kassel, Germany
  • OS: OS X ML; W7; Elementary; Android 4
  • Phone: iPhone 5 64GB Black (6.0.2)

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:21

Well, I think he's absolutely right... :)

Glassed Silver:mac

#8 Lord Method Man

Lord Method Man

    Banned

  • 3,758 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 12

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:27

16x10 is an obsolete aspect ratio.

#9 Joshie

Joshie

    Wandering NPC

  • 4,769 posts
  • Joined: 01-March 02
  • Location: Seattle, WA

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:28

Well, yes and no.

Yes to higher resolutions and escaping this 1080p curse we've been stuck with due to the economics of scale.

No in terms of specifics. That resolution is only one aspect ratio (16:10). While I'm a big fan of 16:10, letterboxing is just annoying when watching movies. For people who care, and want a 16:9 display, the resolution you should be asking for is 2560x1440.

16x10 is an obsolete aspect ratio.


This is an example of the effects of scale. While I think work is more comfortable with the extra vertical resolution, 16:9 completely destroyed 16:10 because it was cheaper to manufacture (monitor panels could be lumped in with TV panels). High-resolution displays are helping us escape the TV technology trap, though, and we might see a rise in != 16:9 displays over the next few years.

On the other hand, if 4K really takes off, large displays might just jump on that bandwagon, and you might start seeing a lot of 27-30" 4K 16:9 monitors on the cheap.

#10 LUTZIFER

LUTZIFER

    Resident Evil

  • 2,664 posts
  • Joined: 09-January 02
  • Location: Vancouver Island, BC CANADA
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro
  • Phone: Google Nexus 4

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:33

Why stop there? I want 4K resolution on my laptop and at least 1080p on my thermostat.

lol!! That's good.

#11 +Audien

Audien

    Software Eng.

  • 4,408 posts
  • Joined: 30-December 03
  • Location: Seattle, WA
  • OS: Windows 8.1/Mac OSX
  • Phone: iPhone 5S

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:36

16:10 is the only way to go for a desktop.

#12 Jacky L.

Jacky L.

  • 12,060 posts
  • Joined: 27-October 04
  • Location: Hong Kong
  • OS: OS X Mavericks
  • Phone: iPhone 5s

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:39

I hate 16:9 for daily workflow.

#13 UseLess

UseLess

    Neowinian

  • 359 posts
  • Joined: 24-July 04
  • Location: Australia, West Coast

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:41

16:10 is obsolete!? It is by far my res of choice. For desktop monitors it is best by far - Letterboxed movies are fine, and the extra height is great for working.

16:10 on a phone/tablet? That I can understand if you say its not ideal, but I still like it...the Nexus10 looks functional to me.

I'm not a pixel junkie myself...I'm very happy with 1920x1200 on a 24" display.

#14 Inklin

Inklin

    Neowinian Senior

  • 1,679 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 08
  • Location: Kent, UK
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro

Posted 03 November 2012 - 02:42

I saw this the other day, It is definitely way past time to move on where it comes to laptop screens and desktop monitors. We've been stuck with 1080p for what seems like an eternity and pretty much every monitor released right now is still 1080p when we all know they can very easily move on to 2560x1600 and even beyond that without raising the cost too much. This res seems to be exclusively kept for top end 30" IPS displays from the likes of dell. It all comes down to the display manufacturers milking 1080p"indefinitely" I have no idea what would push them to finally move on.

#15 Max Norris

Max Norris

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,721 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 11
  • OS: Windows 8.1, BSD Unix
  • Phone: HTC One (Home) Lumia 1020 (Work)

Posted 03 November 2012 - 04:47

16:10 is obsolete!? It is by far my res of choice. For desktop monitors it is best by far - Letterboxed movies are fine, and the extra height is great for working.

I tend to agree, my primary usage is work and occasionally gaming.. just a bit more screen real estate to work with.. games just "feel" a little weird at 16:9 too, but just what I'm used to I guess. I can totally understand some wanting 16:9 instead though.. for me, I got a ginormous TV upstairs for watching movies so the aspect ratio never bothered me. Guess it depends on your primary motivation.